By: Sam G. Sherman, Esq.
Many employers feel that the law has gone so far that they cannot fire any employee for anything without risking liability. Not always true. The Fourth District Court of Appeals recently decided that a church can fire an employee for living with her boyfriend and raising their child together out of wedlock.
Henry v. Red Hill Evangelical Lutheran Church of Tustin involved a female employee teaching in the Church's preschool. Henry was…
By: Jason C. Ross, HFM Labor & Employment Associate
California and Federal anti-discrimination laws generally preclude qualified employers from discriminating against employees “because of” protected attributes and classes, including certain disabilities. One protected disability under both California and Federal employment law is rehabilitated drug addicts.
In a recent California case, the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered the legality of an employer policy forever disqualifying job applicants from employment if they ever failed the employer’s pre-employment drug screen. (Lopez v. Pacific…
By: Alexis Gutierrez
This week, Governor Jerry Brown vetoed Assembly Bill 559, legislation offered in response to Chavez v. City of Los Angeles, the 2010 California Supreme Court decision that upheld trial judges discretion to deny costs to plaintiffs whose small-scale damages in FEHA lawsuits could have been recovered in a limited jurisdiction civil case.
In Chavez v. City of Los Angeles, a unanimous high court held that trial judges should have the discretion to deny costs to plaintiffs whose small-scale damages…